TO: Franklin Conservation Commission
FM: George Russell, AICP
Conservation Agent
RE: Agent’s Report
DATE: June 9, 2014
1.0. PROJECTS
1.0.1. NOI 15 Bald Hill Road: As long as the abutter notification issue has been rectified, all of my concerns have been addressed. I would recommend that special conditions numbers 20, 22, 25-28 & 44 be added to any approval.
1.0.2. RDA 5 Dwight St.: This RDA was filed as a result of activity undertaken prior to any permit filing and enforcement action was taken by my office. Much of the project area has already been cleared. The work is taking place in the buffer zone only and if a negative determination is granted, erosion control barriers need to be installed and then approved by my office prior to any additional site work.
1.0.3. RDA 4 Elm St.: I have generated another letter to the applicant’s surveyor and this letter is below. The proposed quantity of fill and the area to be filled would indicate that the 2,000 ft² of area will be covered to a depth of approximately 6”.
1.0.4. NOI Cooks Farm: The applicant appeared before the ZBA on 6/5/14 and the lot coverage was approved as requested. This “removes” a significant question concerning the drainage and when the final review by the town engineer is completed, the Commission can make a decision on the application.
The applicant has submitted a plan addressing the “Water Resource Plan” for discussion. It is difficult to review these plans since they only present a limited area of the total development and seem to be only planting and mitigation plans. It would be significantly easier to review and comment if a table could be provided that shows the revised wetlands impacts. In addition, the instant plans do not reflect some changes that were made to revised plans already submitted; e.g. the original plans indicate the bridge “needs repair”, subsequent plans show the bridge being replaced and repaired with a covered bridge and the most recent plans, dated 6/5/14, reflect the bridge “needs repair”. I use this as an example since the bridge repair is
jurisdictional. It is going to very time consuming to review multiple sets of prints to determine what is changing, what has changed and what is not changing. The cover letter indicates that a complete set of plans will be presented to the planning board for their meeting on June 16th. It would seem to be more expeditious to review this set of plans.
2.1. Minor buffer Zone Activities
2.1.1. 41 Quince Landing: There are no issues concerning this application.
2.1.2. 42 Quince Landing: There are no issues concerning this application.
2.2 Permit modifications/extensions
2.2.1 14 Garnet Drive: The applicant proposes to eliminate the retaining wall and increase the lawn area. The actual square footage of the proposed lawn area needs to be calculated. The Commission needs to decide if this proposal constitutes an amendment or rises to the level of a new NOI. I would recommend that an amendment is in order.
2.3. Certificate of Compliance
2.3.1. 57 Daniels: A site inspection was conducted on 6/3/14 and all is in order to grant the release.
2.3.2. 418 West Central: A site visit was conducted on 6/3/14 and all is in order to grant the release. The erosion control silt fencing should be removed from the site.
2.3.3. 420-438 West Central: A partial release is in order.
2.4. Discussion items
2.5. Minutes
No Comments
2.6. Violations:
| 
